homesweethomeMrL

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

That’s not his thing. He has zero interest in communicating anything to her that isn’t broadcast loudly. He’s all about the circus, the was never any substance there.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago (5 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Philippine Eagle Owl don’t take no guff

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

This looks like a job for . . . . . Who am I again?

[–] [email protected] 32 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

YES! yes. Do that. Okay MAGA people - on the bus! Let's go! Keep it movin' keep it movin! Next Stop! The Glorious Motherland! Just like you've always dreamed of! C'mon - you too Gingrich - get in there, you fuck! Ok bye!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

Reagan. Talk to Reagan.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 hours ago

"Ayyyy - how you doin?"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago

Always but for a few minutes there it was the only niftily human-curated view of "The Internet".

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

New York Times front page, three days before the 2016 election:

Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia

FUCK YOU NEW YORK TIMES

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

"Secretly"

This is the dead giveaway that NYT does not give a SHIT about all the fucked up pro-Trump shit they've pulled. Not even a little.

This is why I have zero problems when conservatives want to shit on it. "Yeah!" I say. Even though yeah usually they have something good there. Liberal media - yeah right. Fuck.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 6 hours ago (4 children)

I remember 2016.

2016 is when the corporate media world - in particular the newspapers showed their ass and decided profit was more important than a functioning democracy.

It was abhorrent and there was even a few tiny scattered mea culpas afterwards, but of course nothing changed and it even got worse as we can see by right-wing billionaires buying up CNN to make it "a voice of conservatives" specifically - and CNN was already one of the worst!

Anyway - this article is just more of the same. Talking about "nothing" while making it very clear they're trying to smear the candidate in one of a hundred ways. Her emails, probably.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago

That guy’s one slimy mofo

 

"After receiving a tip about a family of Burrowing Owls on the eastern edge of Cheyenne, a photographer rushed to the location in late June. The owlets seemed nearly ready to leave their burrows. Over the years, the photographer has perfected a method using a GoPro on a small tripod, set to take a photo every 5 seconds. They leave the camera behind, allowing the owls to feel comfortable. The challenge lies in the long wait to see if the effort pays off. This shot was taken on June 28th."

📷 Peter Arnold

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/18733672

A key swing county in Georgia has approved nearly $50,000 in funding toward panic buttons for election workers this November.

The Cobb County Board of Commissioners approved the funding on Tuesday as part of a $2.43 million package for the upcoming election presented by the director of the county’s Board of Elections and Registration.

Now, the Board of Elections has the funding to purchase some 200 devices for workers.

The devices are small rectangles that fit in pockets and can be worn on a lanyard, NBC News reports. They can be programmed to send alerts to local law enforcement and can pair with cellphones to transmit the user’s location.

 
 

No, “Star Trek” will not be affected. (CBS studios makes those; this is the PTVS studio).

Paramount leaders also announced last week that they would reduce their U.S.-based workforce by 15% in an effort to save $500 million in annual costs. On Tuesday, the managers said affected employees would be notified in three phases “starting today and continuing through the end of the year.”

view more: ‹ prev next ›